If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the forum FAQ and the House Rules and Forum Guidelines.
You will have to register before you can post. If you find your registration is rejected, please try again using a different username. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Suggestions for future versions
Individual ideas on one subject should still be posted in the wishlist thread, however if you want to discuss your idea with others please create your own thread. Please name your topics sensibly and give an indication of what it is about.
For general ideas or a list please use this Wishlist topic. You can view some older suggestions here

Would someone else who uses FMRTE please check AI match prep / tactics on your saves too - just incase its a problem with my save and isn't universal. I don't want SI wasting time on dead ends if its just my save thats like this.

Come on guys! Letsby Avenue. I could do with some feedback on wether AI match prep is the culprit so I can finally fix my save with FMRTE and get back to losing 20 in a row (oh I wish!).

milner I know you're an FMRTE user, give me your input mate.

Sorry, I don't use FMRTE. Never have and probably never will Just finished 2nd season after my promotion to 2nd German - 14/18 with prediction 17th. I am satisfied. Had some rough patches and some good spells...however, I have the gut feeling this season I will be fighting for promotion as it usually happens. I'd be pleasantly surprised if I don't and the AI proves better than I rate it

Here's what I've just found (sorry, can't get the hang of posting screenies)

I'm on 17 July 2012 - date of first pre-season friendlies. I went through a bunch of the clubs - one from Premier League, Championship, League Two. BSN, Scotland and a Russian club (I don't have Russia loaded).

In EVERY case I see the exact same: Tactic 1 - every single bar is maxed out, 100%. And ZERO for 2nd and 3rd tactic.

The only exception was a club below BSN/BSS level (I don't have a lower leagues file loaded so it isn't playable) which has low figures for the primary tactic (and nothing for the others)

Remember this is the very start of pre-season. For the human manager the players forget much of their familiarity and have to relearn it, but the AI teams are perfect.
Remember also this is the start of the second season.

Therefore, this isn't evidence that proves the game is easier for the human manager, but it is proof that the coding is awry for AI match prep. Badly awry.

Thanks, so that says its not just my save then. If AI match prep and tactics have a significant impact on what happens out on the pitch, this could be the smoking gun.

This must be confirmed first by SI, because this could be a little bug in this year Fmrte.

But, if this is confirmed, that something very odd is happening with the match preparation of AI teams. If is this as any consequence with the "ease" that some users have been experience... yet to be confirmed.

Great work Erimus1876. I think you have fished out the problem and its not that we are getting better at the game. The coding for AI tactic has gone wrong, which is making the game so easy. Hope SI can acknowledge this and tell us they will fix it. The proof is staring down their face now.

Come on guys! Letsby Avenue. I could do with some feedback on wether AI match prep is the culprit so I can finally fix my save with FMRTE and get back to losing 20 in a row (oh I wish!).

milner I know you're an FMRTE user, give me your input mate.

Hi m8, ill send you PM, But this, what you discovered is SICK. Now Im even more upset. PaulC is prob in bed right now, but we really need answer about this in next few days from SI. How did they miss AI match prep. bug? Well, anyway, they must fix this NOW , because its prob biggest reason why game is so easy. BIg bug, really big bug.

Can you do a test for me? Nuke your set piece settings by keeping your DCs and tall threats back. Play 3-4 games and keep a note of your conversion ratio in each. Then post the result here.

Probably best to have only an average free kick taker take the kicks as well.

Will do. But it won't be for a few hours yet. I'll have the results posted around noon (UK time).

By the way, all my set pieces are left on default 'mixed' settings, but I'll make sure all threats are back in defence when I have a corner/free kick. What team should I be, or doesn't it matter? The team I am currently is very poor attribute-wise (9th tier of the English league structure).

Will do. But it won't be for a few hours yet. I'll have the results posted around noon (UK time).

By the way, all my set pieces are left on default 'mixed' settings, but I'll make sure all threats are back in defence when I have a corner/free kick. What team should I be, or doesn't it matter? The team I am currently is very poor attribute-wise (9th tier of the English league structure).

Whatever team you are playing with currently. If you have an rolling save from earlier in the 90/410 season, replaying the games and comparing the conversion ratios with their parallel games would be really useful.

I've holidayed 6 months into my 2nd season to see how AI match preperation and tactics develop.

Here's Man Utd (AI), in January 2013, a good 18 months into the game...

Chelsea...

Barcelona...

At the rate of improvement its going to take 4 or 5 seasons before the AI has fully trained all its tactics to the proficiency the human manager can in less than 1 season. And thats just for the best teams who have the best coaches and best training facilities. I'm not sure how long it will take all the smaller teams to catch up? Maybe 10 seasons?

Here's my teams tactical training at the 18 month stage (notice the 1st one isn't fully complete as I switched tactics back in October 2012, but it soon caught up).

And the screenshot below is typical of the AI teams in my division. Okay it may not be a smoking gun but I do wonder if the reason I finished 2nd with one of the worst teams in the league is because my team is more tactically astute than the other 23 AI teams I played against

Could this explain the following scenario?:

The people finding the game a normal challenge have been playing against AI teams that, on the whole, have stuck to their primary tactic throughout a match. Even though this primary tactic isn't trained as well as it was in FM11, its still much better than them using their 2nd and 3rd tactics aganist you. And those of us who have experienced easy games could be the unlucky ones who have gone up against AI that has used those untrained 2nd and 3rd tactics against us, or at least switched to them during a match?

Of course, all this depends on wether FMRTE is returning accurate data or not and wether MP has that much of an influence on how the AI plays against us. So yes, its still all speculative in my opinion.

I'm looking at all the saves an pkms I have been sent and where an area of the game can be tweaked without unbalancing things for the majority they will be.

As I stated earlier, I want to reduce shelf life of extremes of morale and see if that helps, as well as make team talks a bit harder the lower the managers' reputation in relation to his players. At this stage I honestly haven't found much more to go on at least in terms of the match engine.

I dont have a timeline for this at present as its vital we test it properly given we believe the vast majority of users are very happy with this release.

Well I have found this version of FM to be by far the most enjoyable I have played in MANY years. Please don't turn the game into a mystic meg style try and guess the correct option at teamtalks or when talking to players. For me this is exactly what was wrong with the previous incarnations of FM, they relied WAY too much upon motivating your team through a series of obscure and bizzare phrases.

This is, by far and away, the easiest version of FM, and something does seem to be wrong.

As Chelmsford City, I've played 17 games now in the 1st season, and won a remarkable 15 of them, 1 draw and 1 defeat. I've NEVER changed tactics at all, and only signed some moderately decent players.

I even decided to do a small test, and played the last game against 5th place Salisbury City, with EVERY player out of position, including goalkeeper. Still the same tactic I've used throughout the season so far (straightforward 4-4-2).

The result? I won the game 4-1. With EVERY player out of position.

I used to be very average in previous versions...which I liked, because I had to work dam hard to find success. With this version, I've taken over Chelmsford, signed maybe 4 average squad players, whacked 4-4-2 in as my formation, and then just proceeded to hammer teams. I don't need to do anything at all, it seems.

This is, by far and away, the easiest version of FM, and something does seem to be wrong.

As Chelmsford City, I've played 17 games now in the 1st season, and won a remarkable 15 of them, 1 draw and 1 defeat. I've NEVER changed tactics at all, and only signed some moderately decent players.

I even decided to do a small test, and played the last game against 5th place Salisbury City, with EVERY player out of position, including goalkeeper. Still the same tactic I've used throughout the season so far (straightforward 4-4-2).

The result? I won the game 4-1. With EVERY player out of position.

I used to be very average in previous versions...which I liked, because I had to work dam hard to find success. With this version, I've taken over Chelmsford, signed maybe 4 average squad players, whacked 4-4-2 in as my formation, and then just proceeded to hammer teams. I don't need to do anything at all, it seems.

This is, by far and away, the easiest version of FM, and something does seem to be wrong.

As Chelmsford City, I've played 17 games now in the 1st season, and won a remarkable 15 of them, 1 draw and 1 defeat. I've NEVER changed tactics at all, and only signed some moderately decent players.

I even decided to do a small test, and played the last game against 5th place Salisbury City, with EVERY player out of position, including goalkeeper. Still the same tactic I've used throughout the season so far (straightforward 4-4-2).

The result? I won the game 4-1. With EVERY player out of position.

I used to be very average in previous versions...which I liked, because I had to work dam hard to find success. With this version, I've taken over Chelmsford, signed maybe 4 average squad players, whacked 4-4-2 in as my formation, and then just proceeded to hammer teams. I don't need to do anything at all, it seems.

Ah, the out of position thing again, this time with a better test. Send that to PaulC if you can please because that is not what i'd call 'the most realistic version ever'. I might try this out of position thing for a laugh one time to. On fm10(and i bet fm11) this wouldn't work.

I keep seeing the same argument about 12 being the same as 11.3. Since when 11.3 became the benchmark that we have to go for in every following version. We have been experiencing graduate easing for several versions now and even if 12 was as easy as 11.3 (which I think we established already it isn't), that would not be good enough for quite a lot of us...I personally would expect something better from the newer version, not something that at best is as good as the previous one - makes absolutely no commercial sense. While there have been other improvements in gameplay, the most major issue is getting even larger...so what is the answer to our questions - "it should be very similar to 11.3". Are we supposed to accept that as a positive answer?

Apperently, the only way to enjoy FM12 is to start in lower division, promote unexpectedly with a mediocre team so that in Season 2 you will struggle a bit due to the massive difference in resources between your club and the others in the higher division. However, this lasts 1 (2 seasons max) - then you promote again. This limits the players' choice of clubs quite a bit and you basically know what is going to happen next season. Not goo enough, simply not good enough.

If I understood it right the familiarities within FM12 AI teams are much lower than FM11, correct ? ( after roughly a season )

Does this happen for AI teams correct ?

Does a human team familiarity behave the same between a season of FM11 and FM12 ?

If it happens only for AI teams it is a proof something is deeply wrong, if it happens also for human teams it may be proportional so everybody ( AI and human teams ) gain familiriarities slower and this may it is not an issue.

If I understood it right the familiarities within FM12 AI teams are much lower than FM11, correct ? ( after roughly a season )

Does this happen for AI teams correct ?

Does a human team familiarity behave the same between a season of FM11 and FM12 ?

If it happens only for AI teams it is a proof something is deeply wrong, if it happens also for human teams it may be proportional so everybody ( AI and human teams ) gain familiriarities slower and this may it is not an issue.

As far as I can tell its only an AI problem. It doesn't effect human players match prep / tactics in FM12. But it still needs further looking into to see if this is the cause of "easy game syndrome" or if its something completely different , so even I say its not proved yet. Just looks very promising at the moment. If I can be bothered I'm going to make all the AI teams in my league have full AI match prep on all three of their tactics, using FMRTE, and replay my season. I finished 2nd.... media prediction was 21 out of 23 (not 14th as I first thought) first go around playing against AI with MPs similar to the Bishop Auckland screenshot posted earlier.

I wish my game behaved the same way as everyone elses. First season 6th and fired with liverpool. Second attempt, 15 wins, 2 losses. Then 1 win in 8 games. I'm not crap at the series but from what most of you are saying tactics arent important and playing players out of position can get you wins with 1 loss a season. Maybe I'm not using some winning tactic everyone else read up on or something. Or everyones playing UTD and chelsea.

Erimus, i notice the exact same thing with FMRTE and AI's match prep, no point uploading screen shots as they look the same as you guys have above, good work digging that up, i wonder if it is contributing towards the overall issue.

I wish my game behaved the same way as everyone elses. First season 6th and fired with liverpool. Second attempt, 15 wins, 2 losses. Then 1 win in 8 games. I'm not crap at the series but from what most of you are saying tactics arent important and playing players out of position can get you wins with 1 loss a season. Maybe I'm not using some winning tactic everyone else read up on or something. Or everyones playing UTD and chelsea.

So I was testing something. Taking into account my glorious half season and then 9 games of pure rubbish in a row, I let my assistant manager take over. He won his first match, then his second. So I went on holiday for a month because I wasnt in the mood to really play the game after having 3 players I wanted to sign not be able to come because their agents refused to budge on their 3-4mill pay bonus. Imagine my surprise to find that during that month holiday rival teams had pinched 7 of my staff. I've never seen that happen before in any of the other games ever.

I wish my game behaved the same way as everyone elses. First season 6th and fired with liverpool. Second attempt, 15 wins, 2 losses. Then 1 win in 8 games. I'm not crap at the series but from what most of you are saying tactics arent important and playing players out of position can get you wins with 1 loss a season. Maybe I'm not using some winning tactic everyone else read up on or something. Or everyones playing UTD and chelsea.

As I mentioned upthread, I'm playing Liverpool and I think the difficulty here has mostly to do with the team's extremely high reputation and relatively mediocre players. I went and tried out Tottenham for a bit last night and had none of the problems I'm having with Liverpool. The Liverpool squad is just extremely difficult to motivate. This is most noticeable when you play against small teams 1 or 2 levels below you. With Tottenham, I crushed Championship/League One sides in preseason friendlies with scores like 6-0, 5-1, etc. With Liverpool, the team is just terminally complacent no matter what team talk you give and they just ball watch while some nameless striker casually strolls into the net, stopping to drink tea with Reina along the way.

The flipside is that they tend to overperform against big teams since they're not overawed by the reputation difference. I beat Man Utd at Old Trafford without much trouble and even took out Real Madrid in a friendly, but on the whole, those matches are worth just as much as matches against Norwich.

What would be really nice is to have the option to start the game pre-player purchase for the season. For example if I was signed on instead of the current manager, I wouldnt have the players they'd bought in july/august, and instead would have the money to buy players I'd want. I dont see why they should be there if I'm starting at a time they'd never been bought.

Erimus, i notice the exact same thing with FMRTE and AI's match prep, no point uploading screen shots as they look the same as you guys have above, good work digging that up, i wonder if it is contributing towards the overall issue.

I'm not so sure how much its contributing (if at all). I did a couple of tests, maxed out my next 5 opponents match prep and promptly failed to win a game against any of them;

0-2 lost, 1-3 lost, 1-3 lost, 1-2 lost, 1-1 draw. Dropped from 4th in the table to 8th by the end of it.

So I decided to run a test vs the same team over and over again, a team just 3 points behind me in the table, so pretty much on the same level. To reduce the influence of morale, fitness, and condition, I made them all the same on both teams with fmrte. I played 5 games vs the normal AI MP, then improved their MP in fmrte, and played 5 more to see if there was any difference. There was, but not a significant one. The most telling thing was the press made my opponents odds on favorites in all 10 matches, not giving me a prayer they said I wouldn't get anything from the match, but I got something from 8 out of the 10 games.

As I said earlier in the thread neither Riz nor myself have seen anything MP related in the pkms we have looked at that suggests its any kind of "smoking gun".

Ok, maybe its not "smoking gun", but its really weird that MP of AI is so bad this year. I mean, their 2nd and 3rd is almost 0!! How that happened? In FM11 was fine. Whenever we find something and we think its big, you say it isnt. If moral is not important in game, if MP is not important in the game, then whats important?

Erimus1876- yeah m8, you done more then enough, get some rest and wait for the patch. You done more in last few weeks then people with 5 000 posts. Go play Skryim, its great. O, and they have difficulty levels there, hehe.

Erimus1876- yeah m8, you done more then enough, get some rest and wait for the patch. You done more in last few weeks then people with 5 000 posts. Go play Skryim, its great. O, and they have difficulty levels there, hehe.

Ok, maybe its not "smoking gun", but its really weird that MP of AI is so bad this year. I mean, their 2nd and 3rd is almost 0!! How that happened? In FM11 was fine. Whenever we find something and we think its big, you say it isnt. If moral is not important in game, if MP is not important in the game, then whats important?

Love it. In previous versions of FM I sometimes got sacked in my first season while I got my bearings. This one I've started twice, come 6th twice, won the FA cup twice, fired twice. Liverpool is frustratingly crap to play in this game.

Well done on that mate, I really dont't think that can be proof about the game being easy tbh, I don't know to much people who have won the League cup with a championship team. You should be proud about it of good management IMO

Conversion ratio with un-nuked set pieces is 1 goal per 4.5 shots. With nuked set pieces 1 goal per 8.2 shots (and conceding at 1 in 9.25). Remove the minor advantages of good morale and match prep (if that is the case) and that conversion ratio will fall to circa 1 in 9 - 10. You'll be able to reduce it with exceptional tactical and man management strategy, but not by default, which is what is happening right now.

Conversion ratio with un-nuked set pieces is 1 goal per 4.5 shots. With nuked set pieces 1 goal per 8.2 shots (and conceding at 1 in 9.25). Remove the minor advantages of good morale and match prep (if that is the case) and that conversion ratio will fall to circa 1 in 9 - 10. You'll be able to reduce it with exceptional tactical and man management strategy, but not by default, which is what is happening right now.

So are you saying the main issue is goals from indirect free kicks and corners?

(In your test you have 8 pts with unbalanced MP and 4 pts with adjusted MP: if we consider you've taken two pretty similar teams and lowered every other difference I think your test is a solid base for SI to look deeper in MP situation).

Football Manager Real Time Editor. Basically a data editor that overwrites certain aspects of your saved game data.

Originally Posted by wwfan

Thanks. There's your 'smoking gun'.

Conversion ratio with un-nuked set pieces is 1 goal per 4.5 shots. With nuked set pieces 1 goal per 8.2 shots (and conceding at 1 in 9.25). Remove the minor advantages of good morale and match prep (if that is the case) and that conversion ratio will fall to circa 1 in 9 - 10. You'll be able to reduce it with exceptional tactical and man management strategy, but not by default, which is what is happening right now.

Hmmm so someone has to be an excellent tactician and man manager to get their team to create less chances?, just to get more realistic results? I'm sure there a plenty of people in that 30% who've used their own tactics and still overachieved, hell I did on one save. Maybe we need some player made tactics that instead of trying to dominate and beat the AI every way they can, instead nerf your team by deliberately stifiling their attacking and creativty aspects, forefeit setpieces by setting everyone to defend, all just to get a more competative game against the AI. :/

Originally Posted by Fede_Gu

(In your test you have 8 pts with unbalanced MP and 4 pts with adjusted MP: if we consider you've taken two pretty similar teams and lowered every other difference I think your test is a solid base for SI to look deeper in MP situation).

Yeah I never thought of that, over a season that could amount to a fair few points difference. Still, was too short a test to project it that far. Would be interesting to get a few people who are familiar with fmrte to try it and play a season or two, then compare results to their regular games.

So are you saying the main issue is goals from indirect free kicks and corners?

Yes. It seems that if the user has at least one tall forward and one tall DC, he will score goals from indirect free kicks and corners at a far greater ratio than the AI, even with default settings.

Hmmm so someone has to be an excellent tactician and man manager to get their team to create less chances?, just to get more realistic results? I'm sure there a plenty of people in that 30% who've used their own tactics and still overachieved, hell I did on one save. Maybe we need some player made tactics that instead of trying to dominate and beat the AI every way they can, instead nerf your team by deliberately stifiling their attacking and creativty aspects, forefeit setpieces by setting everyone to defend, all just to get a more competative game against the AI. :/

At the moment nerfing your set pieces will make the game fair. The required ME/AI fix is to give the AI more chance of scoring from set pieces and reduce users' chances. However, until that is in place, you will have to do it manually by deliberately undermining your own routines.

Once this is fair, you will then win through being good strategically, tactically and man managerially, as by doing those things right, you'll create genuine and realistic good chances. Currently, all you have to do is win free kicks and corners and have a relatively stable defence.

Yes. It seems that if the user has at least one tall forward and one tall DC, he will score goals from indirect free kicks and corners at a far greater ratio than the AI, even with default settings.

At the moment nerfing your set pieces will make the game fair. The required ME/AI fix is to give the AI more chance of scoring from set pieces and reduce users' chances. However, until that is in place, you will have to do it manually by deliberately undermining your own routines.

Once this is fair, you will then win through being good strategically, tactically and man managerially, as by doing those things right, you'll create genuine and realistic good chances. Currently, all you have to do is win free kicks and corners and have a relatively stable defence.

I think this is what we're all hoping for, especially those who say just by pressing continue they can win the league (I never experienced it that bad myself though).

Do you think the poor AI MPs have any impact at all? The short term tests I did hinted at it somewhat, but granted they need to be much more prolonged to know for sure.

Yes. It seems that if the user has at least one tall forward and one tall DC, he will score goals from indirect free kicks and corners at a far greater ratio than the AI, even with default settings.

At the moment nerfing your set pieces will make the game fair. The required ME/AI fix is to give the AI more chance of scoring from set pieces and reduce users' chances. However, until that is in place, you will have to do it manually by deliberately undermining your own routines.

Once this is fair, you will then win through being good strategically, tactically and man managerially, as by doing those things right, you'll create genuine and realistic good chances. Currently, all you have to do is win free kicks and corners and have a relatively stable defence.

But that must be fixed. WHats the point in having tall strikers if I cant put them to score goals in set pieces . That makes entire position of tall strikers unplayable!

I think there are probably three issues. The first, and core issue, is the high conversion rate from set pieces for user teams employing at least one tall forward and one tall DC versus the terrible conversion rate from AI teams. As Erimus's kind testing of nerfed set pieces illustrated, undermining your dead ball routines halves your chances of scoring and puts them in the realms of the realistic (you'd expect somewhere between 1 in 8 to 1 in 11. 1 in 4.5 is unmatchable by the AI).

Secondly and thirdly, the user's ability to keep morale high and have good match prep ensures the defence is stable, which makes it even harder for the AI to score in open play against user teams. Note that user teams that win through pressing continue have very low goals against but nothing special in the goals for columns. That is consistent with what I've seen in these games. The user team doesn't create masses of chances, so the goals for won't be hugely impressive, but does convert chances too regularly. The morale and tactical prep advantages then keep the score down at the other end.

But that must be fixed. WHats the point in having tall strikers if I cant put them to score goals in set pieces . That makes entire position of tall strikers unplayable!

wwfan what do you think, can they quickly fix this bug??

I'm sure it will be fixed. Finding the problem is always the most difficult issue, as this thread proves. Once you know what it is, you have something to aim at. Although, right now, don't let that be a tall player's head if you want a competitive gaming experience.

Cheers for that insight wwfan Looks like my 6ft 6' striker is going in the reserves for a while!

As long as you don't send him up for set pieces, you can play him, as his attribute advantages will be realistic in open play. Even smaller players can be dangerous from set pieces, so you won't completely prevent scoring opportunities for dead ball situations. Just keep them in the realms of the realistic.

But in last year version, there was already a issue with the number of goals scored by "human teams" from set pieces (in particulary from corners). I think we all remember the threads talking about the corners taken at the first post.

My point is, this issue was already in last year version, but with FM2011 there was no discussion about the game beeing too easy.

Isn't a bit strange that the same issue is causing the game to be too easy this year?

I think this thread has illustrated just how hard QA and testing can be. We've had multiple eyes looking at the problem from a variety of different angles, yet it has taken two weeks to determine the issues. It also looks like it is a combination of issues as well, which makes it even harder to find the key problems.

For what it is worth, I made a number of bad guesses in some pkms PaulC forwarded me. I was wrong many more time than I was right. It took a long look into an end of season 'too easy' game to identify the problem with high conversion ratios. The problem also isn't obvious at all because the number of goals scored by a single player from set pieces isn't stupidly high, but within the realms of possibility. You had to look at the scoring ratio of players in pretty much every team to identify where the issue was, then see if it was repeated in other saves (thanks Erimus for the info), then if it was preventable by removing the identified issues (with thanks again to Erimus for doing so).

In the end it came down to user teams having a better conversion ratio (somewhere between 1 goal in 4.5 to 6.8 shots) than the best AI ratio (1 goal in 7.8 shots, which is very unusual as well as most AI teams are a fair bit higher). Once you've identified that, you just have to pin down the players that were distorting the ratio and look at the pkms to see how they were scoring. Add in some other minor user advantages and voila, you have your 'win by pressing continue' seasons.

Definitely making great strides here. However, wwfan, in the BSN I have poor corner takers and my forwards/DCs are not great headers at all, yet I was still scoring from an inordinate number of corners (but almost none from free kicks).

But in last year version, there was already a issue with the number of goals scored by "human teams" from set pieces (in particulary from corners). I think we all remember the threads talking about the corners taken at the first post.

My point is, this issue was already in last year version, but with FM2011 there was no discussion about the game beeing too easy.

Isn't a bit strange that the same issue is causing the game to be too easy this year?

I don't know what might have changed. Something in the default setting for user teams perhaps. It might have been an extremely slight change in logic, with a massive knock on. It might even be that the good user morale / poor AI match prep issues is harming the AI's ability to defend set pieces as well. I suspect it is all tied together.

Definitely making great strides here. However, wwfan, in the BSN I have poor corner takers and my forwards/DCs are not great headers at all, yet I was still scoring from an inordinate number of corners (but almost none from free kicks).

Erimus - just have him stay back or lurk outside the box.

Check your player stats to see who is well over expected conversion ratios. Anything above 1 in 4 (for a striker) or one in 7 (for anybody else) for regular goal scorers and you have identified the issue. Also check your overall conversion ratio and measure against the rest of the division.

I don't know what might have changed. Something in the default setting for user teams perhaps. It might have been an extremely slight change in logic, with a massive knock on. It might even be that the good user morale / poor AI match prep issues is harming the AI's ability to defend set pieces as well. I suspect it is all tied together.

A bit off topic:

This what i'm afraid when people talk about introducing difficulty levels in FM.
This game, have so many details that influence each other. A simple change in one area of the game, can make major influence in various aspects of the game.
If then introduce difficulty levels, bu changing some aspects of the game (for example to make it harder), what would be the consequences in other areas of the game? I think that nobofy would know.
This could leave us, with so many bugs.

1. my captain 72%
2. my #1 striker 57%
3. other 55%, then 54%, 53% .... my next player on the list is down in 69th! I think striker #2 and other players are missing because I rested them at the end of the season and played the kids. I kept only the skipper in the first team squad for leadership and striker #1 to break records.

So, my simplistic interpretation is that #1 striker is just damn good - my highest-paid player and clearly the best forward in the division, so his stats are great but not odd.
The stand out stats are my captain, a DC who scored a lot of goals from corners (not all headers). He's also an exceptional player at this level, but should never have stats like that.

What's more my DC#2 has good but reasonable stats. His jumping/heading is better than DC'#1; the key difference appears to be the Strength of the DC#1.
The set piece instruction for DC#1 is 'attack far post' (DC#2 attack near post). It is striker #1 who challenges the keeper. My best corner-taker has 11 for corners.

Good analysis. The 48% ratio is the main issue and the one that is really distorting the game. You'll actually find a number of AI DCs who have a similar or higher conversion ratio. However, they don't have anywhere as near the number of shots (maybe 6-12 per season).

The FCs high scoring ratios are likely to be knock ons from the set piece issue. Because you have a certain number of 'easy' goals during a season (circa 1 every 3 games), the opposition is forced to play a more open style of play than they might have done otherwise. This results in more space for your FCs. If, as I suspect, the morale / match prep is knocking onto a slightly more stable defence, and perhaps a weaker 'open style' for the AI as it isn't trained, then you are going to clean up the division.

Makes perfect sense. My forwards score very few with their heads. I studiously keep the ball on the floor in open play. As you say, the effects of the super-DC-from corners problem on the opposition (open play, damaged morale [morale], no plan B [AI MP]) ensure that my forwards get plenty CCCs in most games.

So we've found the 'smoking gun', but let's not fall into the trap of assuming the easy morale and AI poor MP are red herrings' they are issues that need addressing in their own right (Paul!)

Interesting to see my theory about corner goals is turning out to be true here.(suggested earlier in the thread) Noticed it early on in one of my games.

I think the failure to recognise it was because we already knew there was a 'corner bug' of sorts. If you have a player scoring 20+ goals from corners over a season, you know there is a big issue. Currently, that is only possible by manipulating routines.

What we had is a player scoring circa 15 goals from set pieces (in the game I used to find the problem, the DC had also scored 15, just as in phnompenhandy's game). This isn't a red flag in itself, but only when taken in conjunction with the conversion ratio. There will also have been a few other goals scored by players following up or in different positions. The increased likelihood of a user scoring a goal from a set piece then knocks onto all the open play issues discussed above.

Looking at individual pkms was a waste of time as they couldn't be taken in context with the overall season. Likewise, testing AI teams over a whole season isn't going to help as all the stats are going to match up to expectations. The only way to find the problem was to analyse a whole season of matches in which the user found the game too easy. That firstly requires the user to be worried about the easiness, then be prepared to report it and upload his game. It also needed the user to have a certain type of player to even generate the core issue, which is why it hasn't been a consistent problem for everyone.

From my perspective, this has been one of the toughest 'whys' I've ever seen in FM. I suspect Paul will agree.

Have to say, massive for your complete honesty in this wwfan - no attempt to hide behind diplomacy or patronise us.

Thanks. In the context of the thread as a whole, I thought it was important to do a few things:

1: Highlight the difficulty of catching issues. Too many times I've seen forum users complain that SI's testers aren't doing a good job. Finding the problem(s) in this instance took an awful lot of effort from an awful lot of people.

2: Provide a workaround for people who want a challenging game before there is an update.

3: Dismiss the silly conspiracy rumours about SI intentionally dumbing the game down for mass market / console user appeal. The problem is, quite simply, an extremely well hidden and subtle bug that will only affect users with certain types of players in certain tactical positions.

Just to clarify, what exactly is it that we can do then, at present, to try and make the game a bit more challenging?

I've heard the expression "nuke" your set-piece settings...but what does that entail exactly?

In previous versions people could exploit the Match Engine with certain set-piece settings, thus making their DC score 30+ goals per season. In FM12 bizarrely, the default settings do that, so you get too many goals from set-pieces even when you're not trying to. What happens is that if you have a particularly big muscly defender or striker going for the ball, he'll score from an unrealistic proportion of chances.

Therefore, the 'nuclear' option is to keep your powerful player away from the 6 yard box for set-pieces. To do that, you need to go into the set-pieces creator and manually move him out of the way.

I'll repeat a point I made a couple of days ago - when the fix is out there will be a massive outcry from gamers outraged that their DC has stopped scoring from every corner. Ha!

wwfan, to tie the problem down a little more, how about my stats above: My DC#1 had an unrealistic number of chances and goals, but my DC#2 was within the realms of acceptability. Why? Remember that #2 has better jumping and heading attributes. Is it:

1. DC#1's STRENGTH is the decisive factor?
2. The position at corners - DC#1 set to attack far post - is the problem with 'challenge keeper' and 'attack far post' settings? (how do free kick stats compare?)
3. Is it both in conjunction?
4. Is it one of these factors in conjunction with something else?

wwfan, to tie the problem down a little more, how about my stats above: My DC#1 had an unrealistic number of chances and goals, but my DC#2 was within the realms of acceptability. Why? Remember that #2 has better jumping and heading attributes. Is it:

1. DC#1's STRENGTH is the decisive factor?
2. The position at corners - DC#1 set to attack far post - is the problem with 'challenge keeper' and 'attack far post' settings? (how do free kick stats compare?)
3. Is it both in conjunction?
4. Is it one of these factors in conjunction with something else?

#2 is still pretty high. 1 in 5 is too good for a player who is only a threat at set pieces. As for the the questions, only Paul can really answer those. Personally, I think the far post header is more dangerous than the near post one because the player is meeting the ball and heading it back in roughly the direction it is coming from, not trying to divert the angle. That would be realistic too. It also puts the 'challenge keeper' player into play, who can divert balls headed straight at the keeper past him. Strength may be a factor as well, of course.

Have to say, massive for your complete honesty in this wwfan - no attempt to hide behind diplomacy or patronise us.

Originally Posted by xavierm

I definitely love this thread. It highlights the complexity of every simulation : tweak a little bit some factor, ruin the balance of the simulation.

Totally agree with these . Its been a frustrating ride at times with a few late nights of testing stuff but I enjoyed it and learned a lot. And the best thing is on the whole this threadnaught has been well mannered and very informative throughout from all sides of the FM12 experience.

And at least we've got an insight into how we can temporaily reduce certain aspects or improve others in the game now, to make it a better challenge to those seeking one while waiting for the official patch

I definitely love this thread. It highlights the complexity of every simulation : tweak a little bit some factor, ruin the balance of the simulation.

I'll take a look at my game where I'm clearly overachieving, but last time I checked I had about 15% of my goals on corners, and not too much by my tall players.

The percentage of total is less important than the conversion ratio for the target defender and your overall goals/shots ratio. If they are too good (generated by set pieces and with open play knock ons), the AI won't be able to compete.

Fantastic that the problem has been found and it does help a lot to explaining why i dont suffer, because of the FM11 corner bug i had set my corners up so they aim towards my two smaller strikers, which means i dont score a lot from corners or freekicks. Plus for the 1st 5 seasons my best freekick taker had 11 for the attribute and very rarely hit the intended target,

Its brilliant to see this thread lasted the course and we got to the bottom of it, big well done to Erimus for all his testing, and a big thanks to wwfan and Paul for giving this so much attention.

Somewhat dissapointed by this conclusion, we know for a while that there are a lot goals from set pieces on FM surely the people that complained about the game being too easy noticed that they were scoring a very high number of goals from set pieces? (namely corners).

So the people that were winning everything just pressing continue didn't noticed that they were scoring 30 goals/season (made up number to prove the point) from corners?

It's not 30 goals. It's mid teens, which is why it is difficult to spot. The problem is the high conversion ratio, when user teams score at a goal every 4.5 - 6.5 shots meaning they can play quite conservatively yet guarantee goals. If DCs were scoring 30+ goals, it would have been spotted in a second.

I do not believe it! The ME is straight and AI teams have tall players?

Don't believe it all you want. It is the reason. Go through your own saves to check.

Because it was absolutely imperative the AI didn't score too many goals from corners, it seems like the knock on is that their set piece routines were so bad they hardly scored any. Delivery accuracy would have been tweaked up to ensure they were scoring at the right ratio (dead ball v open play goals). Consequently, any half decent user routine dominates.

Weren't you pretty scathing abut ME testing? This issue highlights exactly how difficult it is to spot problems. 1000 plus posts and two weeks before any solid progress has been made.